There has been no mention of another delay for the version II. It’s still slated to start shipping in July. You can still preorder it at B&H for $2299. Do not expect any sort of price drop on the version II for quite some time.

There's entirely to much waiting for new products for my comfort level - I've had the 24-70 II and 1DX on pre-order from the moment they were open for them, and while I'm sure CR appreciates the views they get from me neurotically checking on news about them daily, I would much prefer actually using them

I do know that the next lens announcement I'll be a whole lot more skeptical and careful about wanting it

Well, at least with this announcement, maybe I can get more for my 24-70 if I decide to sell it and buy the vII, but still not sure if I will. Mine is at least as good IQ as my 24-105, which IMO is acceptable, and I've probably got other things I need more than to replace a lens that doesn't really need replacing. Just good to know I might be able to get a little more for it than I could have just a few months ago, probably. I was thinking about it when they announced vII, and looked at what the used prices were on mine, looked like it was one of the most depreciated lenses in the Canon lineup, at least for an L lens.

Logged

canon rumors FORUM

llcanon

The 70-200 2.8L IS II was on the Canon rebate list by the end of 2010 (the lens was announced in January 2010). So if you can wait, expect $200 - $400 off (with purchase of a camera body) in early 2013. I am still shooting with the legendary 28-70 2.8L which is as good as 24-70 Mk I except for loss of 4mm on the wide end.

h4ldol

I'm debating whether or not to buy the Mk1 for $1600 at Adorama/B&H, which is $700 less than the $2300 Mk2 but it feels lame since a couple months ago the Mk1 was $100-200 cheaper. With IS, $2300 would have been a no-brainer for me, or even $2400. But without it I'm less enthusiastic. Or maybe I'll buy the Mk1 to use this summer and just sell it in a few months and get the the Mk2 to replace it if it turns out to be significantly better than the Mk1.

I recall several threads from a while back with people saying they were waiting to buy the current 24-70mm because the release of the Mk II would drive the prices of the original down. I repeatedly pointed out that the exact opposite occurred with the 70-200mm II. Hate to say I told you so.....

I guess that's one way to force you to buy the more expensive of the 2 lenses... but it was inevitable.

Isn't this exactly what happened when Canon transitioned from 70-200 IS I to 70-200 IS II for $500 more? A short period of time where both were available, then suddenly v. I went out of stock, never to return.

h4ldol

I recall several threads from a while back with people saying they were waiting to buy the current 24-70mm because the release of the Mk II would drive the prices of the original down. I repeatedly pointed out that the exact opposite occurred with the 70-200mm II. Hate to say I told you so.....

Didn't the 70-200mm II have improved IS (one stop?) compared to the I? I think the issue with the 24-70mm II is that the main improvements are IQ, which have to be seen to be judged worth the huge price increase, whereas adding/improving IS or some other physical characteristic of the lens would be more tangible and result in larger demand for a much more expensive lens, thus decreasing rather than increasing demand/price of the previous version of the lens. If the 24-70mm II had been announced to have IS, I would guess that the prices of the 24-70mm I would be below MSRP right now, instead of $200 higher.

Myself, I tried ordering the 24-70mm I from several sources recently and still waiting on the companies' buyers to see if they can get some more stock or not... probably not, in which case I may just get it for above MSRP ($100 or $200 is really not a big deal in the scope of things).